Why “Musk creates value” misses the point
Moment 621
People are defending Elon’s trillions on the basis of the wealth and good he creates. And that’s fine — I do that too.
But it has the unfortunate implication that Musk’s riches are only ethical because of the good he’s doing.
And that just encourages socialists to come up with ever more elaborate litmus tests for whether someone’s wealth is morally acceptable.
In a free market, rich people get rich through consensual exchanges, usually with a great many people.
Most exchanges are positive-sum, so even if the rich person doesn’t have a grand narrative about electric vehicles, free expression, helping the blind, building rockets, or digging tunnels, each exchange made the other party better off.
That’s not irrelevant. It’s an important part of the ethical defense of free markets. But it’s not the crucial issue. The crucial issue is that the exchanges were voluntary. And that can be true even if every trade is zero-sum.
Take a horse-track gambler who becomes rich by consistently exploiting inefficiencies in the betting market. Each exchange is zero-sum: bettors put money in, and only some of them get money out.
If you become rich this way, you didn’t create wealth. But you didn’t harm anyone either. You didn’t steal from anyone. Every exchange was voluntary.
You may not feel the same sense of awe toward this person as you would toward someone who built a fleet of spaceships. Fair enough. But that’s a different question.
So yes, remind people of the good Musk’s companies are doing. It matters, because economics is deeply counterintuitive to most people, especially when it comes to the benefits that emerge from large decentralized systems.
But don’t let them walk away thinking that the good Musk is doing is the reason he “should” be a trillionaire.
He should be rich because the vast number of exchanges he participated in were voluntary.
It’s really that simple.
—
Why “Musk creates value” misses the point. Moment 621


